The Competition & Teaser Thread

[ComradeP]

but the unit one hex away is anywhere from 0 - 250 meters away.

Minor point, but in terms of abstraction the unit can be anywhere from 0 to 500 meters away, not just 0-250 as that's for the hex the unit is actually in. If the scale is 250 meters per hex, the two hexsides furthest removed from eachother on two neighbouring hexes are 2x250 meters away from eachother. Most wargames calculate ranges based on units being at the hexside closest to the enemy they're firing at of the hex they occupy. However, theoretically they could also be on the other side of the hex.

-

38 turns for the longest scenario? I thought the longest scenario lasted several days. With dawn at about 4:00-4:30 am in the summer, and dusk at around 10 pm and half hour turns, 38 turns wouldn't even cover one day as each day would have about 42 turns (30 minute daylight turns from 4 am to 10 pm and 6 nighttime 60 minute turns 18x2+6x1 turns), unless I'm missing something. With dawn at 5, it's still ~41 turns).

[Strela]

but the unit one hex away is anywhere from 0 - 250 meters away.

Minor point, but in terms of abstraction the unit can be anywhere from 0 to 500 meters away, not just 0-250 as that's for the hex the unit is actually in. If the scale is 250 meters per hex, the two hexsides furthest removed from eachother on two neighbouring hexes are 2x250 meters away from eachother. Most wargames calculate ranges based on units being at the hexside closest to the enemy they're firing at of the hex they occupy. However, theoretically they could also be on the other side of the hex.

-

38 turns for the longest scenario? I thought the longest scenario lasted several days. With dawn at about 4:00-4:30 am in the summer, and dusk at around 10 pm and half hour turns, 38 turns wouldn't even cover one day as each day would have about 42 turns (30 minute daylight turns from 4 am to 10 pm and 6 nighttime 60 minute turns 18x2+6x1 turns), unless I'm missing something. With dawn at 5, it's still ~41 turns).

ComradeP,

Yes, you're correct on 42 turns in a day. Dawn is 5am, Dusk is 10pm. Currently from memory there is only two scenarios that start before dawn. Many start hours after dawn.

As far as multi-day in a single scenario, no there isn't any. I think I specifically called that out for this battle. There was little if any fighting in the 6 or so hours of darkness, primarily due to the extremely long day. Both sides attempted to refit, regroup & resupply in the short periods of darkness. There was also significant movement of units overnight but very little fighting.

All the scenarios conclude by midnight if not beforehand.

David

[ComradeP]

After checking the first pages, you indeed mentioned that scale of 1 day max. Somehow, I thought that only applied to the smaller ones (regimental scale and below). My bad. Kind of typical to forget the info given initially after all those pages worth of asking all those questions.

Ah well, with the way this thread is growing in size, I wouldn't be surprised if people ask where the Santa units are when the game's released, as "they were mentioned".

[Pertti]

Panzer Battles is a new simulation series that is designed to fit between Squad Battles and Panzer Campaigns and uses many features of both. It is built on the Panzer Campaigns engine with Squad Battles features as well as new routines to reflect this scale.

Reading the whole topic I see that the above is true, Panzer Battles derives from Panzer Campaigns with elements of Squad Battles. So a general question: how much have the PB designers played, playtested and got inspired by John Tiller's Campaign Series? After all the scale is quite similar - I suppose even for time scale the actual movement and casualty rates will differ less than what 6 vs 30 minutes implies - and JTCS has many concepts and features which are useful for this scale and that were later scrapped in Panzer Campaigns. I see Glenn Saunders is on board: IIRC he was heavily involved, either officially or as a devoted player and scenario designer, in the Talonsoft games. What about the others?

I don't really understand the following snippet from the PB vs JTCS FAQ (emphasis mine):

John Tillers Campaign Series covered multiple hypothetical engagements in a campaign format. Panzer Battles covers a specific battle in depth.

John Tiller's Campaign Series covered multiple historical engagements (with some what-ifs and hypotheticals). Obviously as it covers basically the whole war, it won't cover a specific battle in depth, though for some of the major actions you will find plenty of scenarios.
Sure, there are two campaign games formats: the few, historical "linked campaign games" and the quite useless random/hypothetical "dynamic campaign games", but they are kind of an afterthought and surely not many gamers played them. The strength of JTCS was (and still is?) the hundreds of single engagements. So I would say both games are quite similar in this regard, though one will focus on one big action only, while the other has historical engagements at a similar scale from the whole war.

Finally, I have only seen 2D graphics in this thread. Will there be 3D graphics?

[Xaver]

Well, the AT ranges in infantry is allways a problem, for me in early and middle war infantry is unable to engage tanks/hard targets at range (1 hex) other quetion is assault/close combat... in PzC where the AT guns in regimental and battalion level are not present (and not in all titles, i think now in USA regimental support weapons) i can understand the abstraction but in PzB no.

Yes, the question is, what is the true attack range??? we count the unit hex or no??? i think you dont count it because the infantry soft range is 4, if 4 is for me close to the max range 4+1 is out.

Ammo... this is for me the Achilles heel in all Tiller engines specially when last wargames i buy in all them apply individual value/% in ammo per unit, terrain affect resupply but units have their own fuel/ammo reserves and can fight cut off supply lines certain time. I never like Tiller games in this area because you cant control units ammo/fuel levels they enter in low ammo/fuel totally random even when they are in a well supply hex with a good command chain they enter in low ammo... apart the problem in PzC with the isolated rule where you can have an unit days in a position and in 2 hours fighting in isolated status be low ammo... WTF a unit as garrison in a city enter in low ammo in 2 hours??? WTF they dont have depots???

But i dont see SQB much better here, for me use a weapon degradation is a psss solution, if you have limited the use of certain weapons... why not give to main guns in a squad a limit of shoots??? in defensive fire every time you shoot this could count only between 1/2-1/4 of a shoot in your turn.

And finally, i dont see why PzB doesnt have scens covering battles in more than 1 day, a scen with 100 or more turns... is nothing strange in Tiller games (even more, you can play Jena in a single scen for example and here you have 10-15 minutes turns, 6 days of fight in 524 turns) i am more a medium scens player but i dont say no to big scens in turns... apart this, you can create a battle scenario covering in a single scen all the fight this could be good for team games for example.

I like PzB??? yes, all i see made me like it but as in all Tiller games they are not perfect for me specially today when are wargames that cover some of the Tiller engine weak points, at least for me... but well, they have their own weak points to

[Strela]

Panzer Battles is a new simulation series that is designed to fit between Squad Battles and Panzer Campaigns and uses many features of both. It is built on the Panzer Campaigns engine with Squad Battles features as well as new routines to reflect this scale.

Reading the whole topic I see that the above is true, Panzer Battles derives from Panzer Campaigns with elements of Squad Battles. So a general question: how much have the PB designers played, playtested and got inspired by John Tiller's Campaign Series? After all the scale is quite similar - I suppose even for time scale the actual movement and casualty rates will differ less than what 6 vs 30 minutes implies - and JTCS has many concepts and features which are useful for this scale and that were later scrapped in Panzer Campaigns. I see Glenn Saunders is on board: IIRC he was heavily involved, either officially or as a devoted player and scenario designer, in the Talonsoft games. What about the others?

I don't really understand the following snippet from the PB vs JTCS FAQ (emphasis mine):

John Tillers Campaign Series covered multiple hypothetical engagements in a campaign format. Panzer Battles covers a specific battle in depth.

John Tiller's Campaign Series covered multiple historical engagements (with some what-ifs and hypotheticals). Obviously as it covers basically the whole war, it won't cover a specific battle in depth, though for some of the major actions you will find plenty of scenarios.
Sure, there are two campaign games formats: the few, historical "linked campaign games" and the quite useless random/hypothetical "dynamic campaign games", but they are kind of an afterthought and surely not many gamers played them. The strength of JTCS was (and still is?) the hundreds of single engagements. So I would say both games are quite similar in this regard, though one will focus on one big action only, while the other has historical engagements at a similar scale from the whole war.

Finally, I have only seen 2D graphics in this thread. Will there be 3D graphics?

Hi,

It is my 'fault' that I described JTCS as such. I have only had passing interaction with it and my understanding is that many of the stock scenarios were based off very loose orders of battle etc. I completely understand that JTCS has a dedicated community that has built some very accurate orders of battles, scenarios & campaigns. I have already been dinged privately on the 'hypothetical' comment and want to make it very clear that I wasn't trying to demean in any way JTCS or its aficionados - it was purely me passing on a description I had been told. From that it should be clear I have had minimal time with JTCS, so it is of little influence for me. That said, Glenn built the first title that to this date has not been released and the DNA of that initial work is in the upcoming title. If Glenn was involved with JTCS then there may be have been some consideration - I can't confirm that.

There has also been a lot of development of the Panzer Battle system since we started the project, largely due to the play testers that have been involved. Many have had extensive war gaming experience and many of the features and decisions made have come from those years of gaming. We have been fortunate that John Tiller has made changes to the system if we have presented a well reasoned argument that shows a material enhancement to the simulation. John has added new features to all his games as further titles have been released and I expect Panzer Battles will be the same as new topics are covered.

So in summary JTCS may have been one of the influences on the various testers, but much broader experience has been more prevalent.

As far as 3D graphics - no, it's only 2D with the range of different counter sets and the map with 'depth' contours.

---

Well, the AT ranges in infantry is allways a problem, for me in early and middle war infantry is unable to engage tanks/hard targets at range (1 hex) other quetion is assault/close combat... in PzC where the AT guns in regimental and battalion level are not present (and not in all titles, i think now in USA regimental support weapons) i can understand the abstraction but in PzB no.

You've seen an example of the OB, the AT/Infantry guns are all there at battalion & regimental level. The question regarding Panzerfausts is how they were handled in PzB. In SqB they are separate weapon systems, in PzB's they are not. Essentially infantry platoons have there small arms, embedded MG's and AT capabilities built into their hard and soft factors. The assault value (i.e. in hex) will take into account factors such as prevalence of automatic weapons, engineering weaponry such as flame throwers and the veracity of infantry AT weapons. So I don't quite understand where you are seeing an abstraction.

Yes, the question is, what is the true attack range??? we count the unit hex or no??? i think you dont count it because the infantry soft range is 4, if 4 is for me close to the max range 4+1 is out.

A range of four means you can hit a unit four hexes away. There has been a nice little enhancement that we only got in the last build that colour codes the various ranges. Blue is AA, Red is hard & green is soft. This example has a soft range of four.

Ammo... this is for me the Achilles heel in all Tiller engines specially when last wargames i buy in all them apply individual value/% in ammo per unit, terrain affect resupply but units have their own fuel/ammo reserves and can fight cut off supply lines certain time. I never like Tiller games in this area because you cant control units ammo/fuel levels they enter in low ammo/fuel totally random even when they are in a well supply hex with a good command chain they enter in low ammo... apart the problem in PzC with the isolated rule where you can have an unit days in a position and in 2 hours fighting in isolated status be low ammo... WTF a unit as garrison in a city enter in low ammo in 2 hours??? WTF they dont have depots???

And that's why we have taken those out of PzB as a consideration - at least for this initial release. As I mentioned there were no issues with supply in this particular battle. The change was driven specifically because of a discussion about the way units drop to low ammo as soon as they are isolated. That sparked a deeper conversation around combat loads and the period each scenario was covering. If I was doing a game on the Moscow Counterattack then I would be wanting some enhancements to the supply rules that we have, but I can categorically say that this release is not the Battle of Moscow

And finally, i dont see why PzB doesnt have scens covering battles in more than 1 day, a scen with 100 or more turns... is nothing strange in Tiller games (even more, you can play Jena in a single scen for example and here you have 10-15 minutes turns, 6 days of fight in 524 turns) i am more a medium scens player but i dont say no to big scens in turns... apart this, you can create a battle scenario covering in a single scen all the fight this could be good for team games for example.

No one is stopping you having a scenario of any length. We chose not to have scenarios longer than I have mentioned because they best represent the battle that way. Future titles may have longer battles if appropriate. This series is not intended to be a platoon level Panzer Campaigns. The design intention by John Tiller was for Panzer Battles always to focus on engagements rather than sweeping multi day campaigns. There has been discussion of using a campaign engine linking scenarios similar to what has been seen in the Civil War and Squad Battles games that may make it into a future release. How that would work I'm not certain.

As far as team games, the play testers will tell you there are some very good scenarios for team play - the difference to Panzer Campaigns is that you might actually finish them...!

David

[Pertti]

It is my 'fault' that I described JTCS as such... and want to make it very clear that I wasn't trying to demean in any way JTCS or its aficionados

I wasn't implying that, and I am sure JTCS players will be as interested as me about PB.

That said, Glenn built the first title that to this date has not been released and the DNA of that initial work is in the upcoming title. If Glenn was involved with JTCS then there may be have been some consideration - I can't confirm that.

So in summary JTCS may have been one of the influences on the various testers, but much broader experience has been more prevalent.

Oh, so Glenn is no more involved. It will be interesting how the two products will compare. I am sure JTCS has a scenario or two about the battle portrayed in the first PB game.

As far as 3D graphics - no, it's only 2D with the range of different counter sets and the map with 'depth' contours.

Too bad, as it would make more sense than 3D in the bigger scale Panzer Campaigns. I know most die hard PBEM players prefer 2D, but some like the miniature wargame look of a 3D view. The better and bigger 2D graphics certainly make up for the lack of 3D, at least partially.

I am definitely looking forward to this game. This is after all a favourite scale of gamers since the times of the Panzerblitz and Panzer Leader boardgames, not forgetting popular miniature wargame rules such as Command Decision or earlier computer games, JTCS just one of them.

[76mm]

David, thanks for all of your contributions to this thread.

You mentioned the possibility of multi-day battles, but could you clarify whether the game includes night rules as well, or you've have to "take a break" overnight for multi-day battles?

[Strela]

David, thanks for all of your contributions to this thread.

You mentioned the possibility of multi-day battles, but could you clarify whether the game includes night rules as well, or you've have to "take a break" overnight for multi-day battles?

76mm,

No need to 'take a break' per se. Night works as it does in PzC. That said, John removed the 'night fatigue' rules as he didn't expect there to be much more than say two days & a night in the longest scenario. Night currently is one hour turns while all others (including dawn & dusk) is 30 mins.

The beauty is that PzB was built off PzC code. If we believed that a particular battle/scenario requires night fatigue or some other feature we could get it reinstated.

David

[ComradeP]

Just curious, but wouldn't night fatigue become more instead of less important when there are more night turns? In other discussions, night fatigue was mentioned as being needed to keep a mobile opponent from encircling slower units during night turns as if it was day like in Tunisia '43.